Legal Commentary

The Catholic Archbishop for Northeastern Kansas, Joseph Naumann (who I've discussed previously), caused an uproar in certain segments of the secular press, in corners of the Catholic left, and in Catholic haters of all religious and political stripes, when he publicly rebuked Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius for a political career devoted to upholding a woman's legal right to secure abortion and urged her not to receive communion until she repented and made a clean confession. The straw that broke the archbishop's back was the governor's veto of legislation passed by the Kansas House and Senate, the Comprehensive Abortion Reform Act. However, that was only the latest evidence of the failure of a long line of unsuccessful private counseling endeavors undertaken by the archbishop, and other Kansas bishops, with the governor, to attempt to impress upon her the fact that her positions are contrary to a non-negotiable, fundamental doctrine of the Catholic faith that she professes.

In a Q&A with the Topeka Capital Journal, Archbishop Neumann clarified that this private back-and-forth with "Queen Kathleen" (as a hard-right brother-in-law from Topeka refers to her) has been ongoing for years and has been fruitless.

My initial request for the governor not to present herself for Communion was before her veto of the Comprehensive Abortion Reform Act. I challenged the governor to produce a single instance in her legislative or executive career where she has supported any effort to limit abortions. In the 1980s and 1990s, as a state representative, she voted to weaken or eliminate even such modest measures as parental notification for teens, waiting periods, or informed consent protections for women before an abortion. When Gov. Sebelius was running for reelection in 2006, she was profiled on Emily?s List Web site and quoted as saying: ?I have always led the fight to ensure that abortion is safe, legal and rare.? Emily?s List is a political action committee that only supports women candidates who support legalized abortion. On that same Web site it stated: ?As governor she (Kathleen Sebelius) has vetoed legislation to severely limit women?s choices.? My request for the governor not to present herself for Communion, was not about any one action, but a 30-year history of advocating and acting in support of legalized abortion.

The Journal asks the archbishop a question that displays the questioner's ignorance of basic Catholic doctrine as well as a flawed understanding of the First Amendment: "Is it not wrong for the church to attempt to impose its religious beliefs on others?" As opposed to what? Attempts by the  irreligious to impose upon the people of the United States their definition of when a human life "begins," in the sense that it is entitled to be legally protected in the same manner as the life of any other human being? Isn't that an ontological question that requires some system of basic "beliefs" in order to be answered? If so, somebody's system of belief must prevail and, therefore, everybody gets to weigh in, not merely those with secular "beliefs."

Archbishop Naumann sets them straight with much less snark and with a broader perspective than yours truly, which is why he's a successor to the apostles and I'm not.

For the Catholic in public life, the unequivocal defense of such a fundamental human right is not imposing one?s Catholic faith upon others. The fact that the church addresses the morality of such a basic right does not make this an exclusively religious issue. Just as supporting public policies that prohibit stealing, racism, or murder ? moral issues also very clearly addressed by the church ? is not an imposition of Catholic doctrine, neither is advocating for policies that protect human life in its earliest stages.

Throughout the Q&A, the archbishop patiently explains the Church's position on this issue with clarity. Of course, Catholic haters in the comments box don't appear to get it, but people of good will understand the archbishop's position, even if they disagree with it.

I'm not a fan of Kathleen Sebelius, but she's reportedly on Senator Obama's short list for a vice presidential spot, and people better start taking note of her positions on the issues. I admit that while I was initially turned off by her atrocious televised response on behalf of the Democratic Party to the most recent State of the Union address (she appeared to be a cigar store Indian brought to life, but not alive enough to talk in anything other the most annoying monotone), it's her positions on substantive issues, not her speaking style, on which she ought to be evaluated. Her position on abortion rights places her on the side of the abortion debate with those Catholics who think the "right to choose" applies not only to legal rights, but to the basic doctrines of the Roman Catholic faith. Like Gary Wills and others, she calls herself "Catholic" and receives communion at the risk of the damnation of her immortal soul notwithstanding her rejection of basic tenets of her faith, because she believes that she can pick and choose the doctrines of that faith that she can support and that she can reject. "Cafeteria Catholics" they're called and this country is full of them, whether the issue in dispute is over abortion, gay marriage, birth control, or a host of other fundamental issues. They deny, or employ a "willful blindness" toward, the binding authority of the Church hierarchy to set doctrine if they, personally, disagree with it. I always thought that's what constituted being a "protestant."

The hubris of Queen Kathleen's pride would be breath-taking were it not so prevalent in this day, especially in this country. We're an arrogant nation full of libertarians who personally remake their religion to fit their individual preferences. Usually, that reconstituted faith is "religion lite." Instead of shocking me, the governor's attitude makes me depressed.

The initial responses from the governor's spokesperson (the governor has not personally responded to the archbishop) are telling. First, her spokesperson stated that the governor has not had a problem in the past in receiving communion, which is completely non-responsive. Although the archbishop has the authority to prohibit the eucharistic ministers within the diocese from giving her communion, he hasn't done so and is instead asking her not to receive communion voluntarily because she has committed a mortal sin (repeatedly) and will continue to commit a mortal sin if she continues to do receive communion without reversing her position on abortion rights, repenting her previous rejection of church teaching, and making a full confession. The fact that she hasn't been previously denied communion is meaningless. Also, the spokesperson said that the governor was crafting a response which she would give "in a few weeks." How could she not have in hand an articulated, well thought out position on this absolutely fundamental issue of her faith? Why does she need to take weeks to craft a response? Does she need to take a public opinion poll first?

"Roman Catholic." Like Humpty told Alice, "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean?neither more nor less." I'll await her well-crafted response with great anticipation.

Adding fuel to this fire is the association of Sebelius with campaign contributor George Tiller, a notorious late-term abortionist, which continues to create a stir in Kansas. From last Friday's Topeka Capitol-Journal comes a story about a 2007 function at the governor's mansion that was attended by Tiller and some of his associates at a time when Tiller was under investigation by the Attorney General of Kansas:

Tiller, one of the country's few doctors performing late-term abortions, was under investigation by the attorney general's office for allegedly performing illegal late-term procedures at his Wichita clinic.

Tiller was eventually charged with 19 misdemeanor counts alleging he failed to obtain a second opinion from an independent doctor for some abortions, as the law requires. Tiller has denied the charges, and the case is still open.

On Monday, conservative columnist Robert Novak wrote in The Washington Post that Sebelius invited Tiller and his staff to a party. Novak crowned the governor "the national pro-choice poster girl."

Since taking office in 2003, Sebelius has vetoed four abortion bills, most recently a comprehensive measure that among many provisions would have allowed private citizens to sue to block what they think are illegal late-term procedures.

Her stance on the issue has garnered strong support from abortion-rights groups, including $12,450 in campaign contributions from Tiller and his wife between 1994 and 2001.

If Obama is serious about picking a running mate who will shore up the votes of those white, blue collar, God-fearing, gun-toting, Reagan Democrats he's been losing to Hillary Clinton in the primaries (and will likely lose to John McCain in the general election), he might want to scratch Queen Kathleen off his list.